Who supports the household?

[TomS]

..if you can't trust St. John, then who can you trust, right?

(Saint) John Chrysostom: The strongest attacks on Jews and Judaism by the Church Fathers are to be found in the homilies of Chrysostom (344-407) in his Antioch sermons. He is considered to be among the most beloved and admired in Church history. Besides his proclamation of Jews as "god-less, idolaters, pedicides, stoners of prophets, and commiters of 10,000 horrors [which, incidentally, is found in the anti-Jewish Christian Bible in Matthew 23:37-38], Chrysostom declared the following in his work Orations Against The Jews: "The Jews are the most worthless of all men. They are lecherous, rapacious, greety. They are perfidious murderers of Christ. They worship the Devil. Their religion is a sickness. The Jews are the odious assassins of Christ and for killing God there is no expiation possible, no indulgence or pardon. Christians may never cease vengeance, and the Jew must live in servitude forever. God always hated the Jews. It is essential that all Christians hate them" (year 379). Furthermore: "The Jews sacrifice their children to Satan. They are worse than wild beasts. The Synagogue is a brothel, a den of scoundrels, the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults, a criminal assembly of Jews, a place of meeting for the assassins of Christ, a house of ill fame, a dwelling of iniquity, a gulf and abyss of perdition. The Jews have fallen into a condition lower than the vilest animal. Debauchery and drunkenness have brought them to a level of the lusty goat and the pig. They know only one thing: to satisfy their stomachs, to get drunk, to kill, and beat each other up like stage villains and coachmen. The Synagogue is a curse, obstinate in her error, she refuses to see or hear, she has deliberately perverted her judgment; she has extinguished with herself the light of the Holy Spirit." He elaborated further on God's punishment of the Jews: "But it was men, says the Jew, who brought these misfortunes upon us, not God. On the contrary, it was in fact God who brought them about. If you attribute them to men, reflect again that even supposing men had dared, they could not have had the power to accomplish them, unless it had been God's will. Men would certainly not have made war unless God had permitted them. Is it not obvious that it was because God hated you [Jews] and rejected you once for all?" On yet another occasion Chrysostom is quoted as saying "I hate the Jews because they violate the Law. I hate the Synagogue because it has the Law and the prophets. It is the duty of all Christians to hate the Jews." Chrysostom's homilies were to be used in seminaries and schools for centuries as model sermons, with the result that his message of hate would be passed down to succeeding generations of theologians. The nineteenth century Protestant cleric R.S. Storr called him "one of the most eloquent preachers who ever since apostolic times have brought to men the divine tidings of truth and love." A contemporary of Storr, the great theologian John Henry Cardinal Newman, described Chrysostom as a "bright, cheerful, gentle soul; a sensitive heart."

[joasia]

Tom,

I know that St. John had very serious accusations against the jews. He was referring to their total hatred of Christ. And for that, they will be judged. But, I have a feeling that the quotes you posted are from a source that may be anti-Chrysostom and therefore translated with harsher words than St. John wrote. It is a popular tactic of the jews. Was it a jewish source, perhaps?

[TomS]

Was it a jewish source, perhaps?

Not that I know of. The site seems to treat all religions as suspect.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/

...translated with harsher words than St. John wrote

From what I can tell the transalation seems to be pretty consistent across the net.

Besides, the point is that in MANY cases you cannot take the views of someone who lived 1500 years ago and say that they are applicable to today's world/culture.

My stance on this subject - It is the responsibility of the man to provide for his wife and children. In my first marriage my wife never worked after my first 2 children were born, and in my current marriage, Niki stopped working when Nicholas was born.

[joasia]

From what I can tell the transalation seems to be pretty consistent across the net.

So, you're an expert on Greek translations, then?

Besides, the point is that in MANY cases you cannot take the views of someone who lived 1500 years ago and say that they are applicable to today's world/culture.

Oh, that's for sure. Today's culture is so filthy with corruption, in the depth of the soul, that the healthy, spiritual views of 1500 years ago, would seem like the most bizarre concept. Of course, most of the populace couldn't possibly grasp it...they're to into their filthy corruption.

My stance on this subject - It is the responsibility of the man to provide for his wife and children. In my first marriage my wife never worked after my first 2 children were born, and in my current marriage, Niki stopped working when Nicholas was born.

Well, thank you, for finally addressing the present subject.

I believe that our society, which is driven by gnostism and created feminism because of it's hatred of Christ, has planted these seeds of anti-Christianity.

Society has developed the perception that women are considered failures because they are stay-at-home moms and housewives. It's a big ego trip. And who started this big broo-ha-ha...feminists, who by the way, were lesbians. Gloria Steinem(or whatever her name is) is a lesbian. They instigated the anger towards men that developed over the decades. But, of course, Tom, your comments don't help either.

By the way, why don't we ever hear from your wife? I'd like to hear her point of view, for a change.

[Myrrhbearer]

That was a bit of a railing on St. John, eh?

I read a very interesting pamphlet called, "Christian Modesty, and the undressing of America". It basically follows the history of the swimsuit, and relates how this brought about major changes in dress altogether. Basically, the swimsuit industry had ties with hollywood, and the underwear industry. Hollywood was used to desensitize society....with each new suit, there was a bit less fabric, purposely pushing what was legally permissible amounts of skin to be shown in public. As people got used to what they saw...or didn't see, much like today, things normalized. Then there was also the whole women going to work for the war effort.... The seeds of feminism were obviously deeper than the 60's. Ann Hutchinson ended up being banished from the massechussett's (sorry, I can never spell that state!) colony because she was accused, and in the court of the time, convicted of publically teaching men. That was her biggest offense-even though her husband supported her, the other leaders of the colony were threatened by this woman stepping outside what they felt were the boundaries in Christianity.

We can go all the way back to Eve really....SHE is the one who first fell, and then encouraged her husband...we know that story.

As to who is the breadwinner, I do think, if possible, it is better for the man to be in this position, but I don't think being the breadwinner is the crux of my question. The question is independent of time periods, as I think, it should transcend time. It hasn't because of societal changes and pressures, which is why it is difficult to put the answer into practice, but does the Orthodox Church agree that a woman is to be under the authority of her husband? AND what does this entail? In Titus, Paul talks about women being subject to their husbands....In corinthians he speaks about women being bound to their husbands, that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of every woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Anyway, in this day and age, girls are encouraged just like boys to plan their careers, plan how they want their life to go....how to meet their desires....As a Christian I recall being taught to be a servant yes, but so were the boys. There was never a role differentiation, yet, the Bible clearly, repeatedly gives examples, and exhortations about this. I have read St. John, I just unfortunately, don't honestly remember what he said! My bad. I just find, that while I am training my son and daughters, and trying to create an other-worldly atmosphere for them, I am also having to relearn myself.

I run into Orthodox women and men who say to me OH, women are not to be submissive to their husbands...so in fear of being protestant, they may not even allow for being SUBJECT to???? This is just definitely counter culture these day....

joanna #2